It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


What weight loss program are you on or use?

page: 2
<< 1    3 >>

log in


posted on Jul, 30 2011 @ 01:49 PM

Originally posted by lilowl53
I need to loose about 60 lbs, because of a rencent heart condition I was diagnosed with. I need to ease the stress on my heart by reducing body mass. I am about 180lbs and 5'4''. I know, not fat at all really (in my opinion).

Reality check: 5'4" and 180 is considered obese.

My excerise already consists of walking a mile a day, and swimming.

Please understand that, given your current metabolic condition, exercising will increase hunger and may cause you to binge. Often times, exercise can be counter-productive in obese individuals. So, for now, I would stick with what you're doing...very light exercise.

It would really help to know what you're eating now and when you're eating it....

It really is important to understand how you became unhealthy before addressing the problem and trying to find a solution that fits you.
edit on 30-7-2011 by DevolutionEvolvd because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 30 2011 @ 03:42 PM

Originally posted by dbates
reply to post by lilowl53

#1. Weight is a sum of calorie intake minus calories burned. 3,000 calories is worth about 1 lb. so cut out 6,000 calories a week and you can steadily lose about 2 lbs a week. Don't try to do it all at once. You'll just lose muscle tone. Count calories and plan your meals. Check your weight first thing every morning. You'll see it vary a pound or two but if it's not moving down an average of 2 lbs within a week either increase the exercise or decrease the calorie intake.

Calorie counting is a complete waist of time. Not only is it almost impossible to count calories accurately, it's pretty clear that caloric measurements provided by food labels are almost never accurate (100%). That's not even including such things as digestibility, bioavailability and hormonal fluctuations, all of which certainly affect calories in/calories out.

Not to mention...eating less typically slows metabolism. So, eating a calorie restricted diet will work at first, but the inevitable plateau will soon be followed by extreme hunger and, eventually, fat re-gain (often times more than the starting fat point).

The idea that weight loss is simply about calories in vs. calories out is an absurdly misapplication, and misunderstanding, of the laws of thermodynamics. A calorie is not a calorie. Go ask the millions and millions of fat people who constantly diet how many calories they're taking in. I guarantee the amount of them on restricted calorie diets will surprise.

#2. Eat your food in smaller more frequent meals. Don't snack between meals, eat lunch in 2 smaller segments.

Meal frequency is irrelevant.

Collectively, these data support the consumption of HP intake, but not greater eating frequency, for improved appetite control and satiety in overweight/obese men during energy restriction-induced weight loss.

...which supports the idea that a calorie is not a calorie. Simply eating more frequent, smaller meals is irrelevant. Make it a high protein diet and the difference is quite significant.

#4. As some have noted all foods are not equal. Higher protein, low-fat foods and complex carbs (Yes, I love carbs) take longer for your body to digest and will be less likely to be stored as fat.

Let's not scare anybody into avoiding fat.
Dietary fat doesn't "turn into" body fat any more than dietary carbohydrates turn into body fat. (you aren't what you are what your body does with what you eat)

Will you be hungry some times? Probably so but it's more mental than anything. You're not going to have stomach cramps or unhealthy side effects. Most of the time when you eat out of hunger you could just as easily do an activity to get your mind off of food. You're probably just bored. Once you realize this is more a mental game than a physical one you're on your way to being more healthy.

That is the reason why millions of people are struggle with losing weight and keeping it off. They're told it's about will power. It's about being hungry. They're told to "be mentally strong" and "don't be lazy"....Psychologists should stay out of nutrition. Once people begin to realize that obesity is, generally, a physiological issue, not psychological, it'll become less about how fat people are lazy or lack the will power and more about what foods keep them satiated and allow for metabolic hormones to stabilize and cause fat to flow in AND out of the fat cells for fuel.

The reason why restricted calorie diets don't work--and they don't long term...have a gander at the last 40 years of research--is because your psychological approach will eventually give in to the physiological effects. The physiological controls the psychological when one is discussing biochemistry and caloric thermodynamics.

posted on Jul, 30 2011 @ 04:05 PM

Originally posted by DevolutionEvolvd
Calorie counting is a complete waist of time. Not only is it almost impossible to count calories accurately, it's pretty clear that caloric measurements provided by food labels are almost never accurate (100%).

That's irrelevant actually. Typically people eat the same types of food or same foods on a week to week basis. If you've estimated a bologna sandwich to be 300 calories and it's really 200 it won't matter in the long run. The key is knowing what more or less is in respect to what you're consuming. That means keeping track of perceived calories even if your not 100% correct.

It doesn't even matter if my scale is off by 10 lbs. since all I really care about is if it is going up, down, or staying the same.

As for the impossibility of keeping track, I would recommend doing a food log for a week if for no other reason than to get an idea about what a healthy meal looks like. Once you have a good idea in your head you can be less specific about it. There's no need to track calories every day that exactly.

posted on Jul, 30 2011 @ 04:37 PM
reply to post by dbates

It is irrelevant...since counting calories, whether accurate or not, doesn't work if calorie restriction is the only process by which weight-loss is expected to occur.
edit on 30-7-2011 by DevolutionEvolvd because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 30 2011 @ 04:59 PM
reply to post by DevolutionEvolvd

Sure, ideally you should be performing some weight bearing exercises and doing cardio. I was under the impression that the OP was already doing some moderate exercise to the best of his ability and wanted to know how best to partner that with diet to get to a better weight range. To be more to the point, you want more muscle because it burns calories even when you're at rest. Simply cutting calories isn't healthy because it lowers your metabolism. Exercise counters this process.

Of course once you get to the weight range you want then you don't have to worry about calories as much just for maintenance but don't kid yourself into believing that you can be healthy and not monitor your calories. At least in a general sense, If you eat a large jar of peanut butter and a gallon of ice-cream every day you're going to get fat no matter how much exercise you do.

From personal experience, your weight is comprised of about 60%-70% diet and the rest your activity level. Go buy any health magazine you wish and look at all the articles on how to prepare tasty healthy meals. Meals matter as much or more than the exercise part, but proper exercise does reduce the need to watch your meals as much.

posted on Jul, 30 2011 @ 06:24 PM

posted on Jul, 30 2011 @ 06:45 PM
reply to post by schrodingers dog

That's an amazing story. Congrats and thanks for chiming in. That's no small achievement. I was just saying how diet was more of the matter than exercise and I think you're a great example of just that.

It's just my personal experience that no matter how much exercise you do you won't lose weight if you don't eat good. And I'm talking about a LOT of exercise. 30 min of cardio in the morning before eating 5 days a week + 3-4 days a week doing exercises with free weights. You get stronger, it's great for you, but it won't kill the love handles alone.

Furthermore you can lose weight by simply controlling your diet and not exercising. If I can't exercise as much I cut back on food. I hurt my shoulder pretty bad this last October and haven't been in the gym much at all.

One can only conclude the diet matters more than exercise but of course both are good for you. For people who can't exercise much due to health issues, don't feel like you have to put on pounds. I was going to mention I put off 20 lbs. mostly by keeping my meals under control but that's no sacrifice compared to your achievement.

posted on Jul, 30 2011 @ 07:07 PM
reply to post by dbates

Thanks dbates,

Yeah it was a difficult process, especially at the beginning, but once one gets going and the results start to show, it tends to generate it's own momentum, both physically and psychologically.

For what it is worth, as that thread was written some time ago, I ended up loosing 105 pounds in total to my low point last month at 162lbs (now at 165). Believe it or not it was not my intention to lose that much, because about 170 is the ideal weight for me to be healthy and to all but alleviate my back pain. But just as it is hard to stop the momentum of weight gain, it is just as hard to stop the weight loss. Especially if it is borne of long term eating habits, healthy as they may be, the body is still programmed for weight loss. So in the end i discovered that a final regimen needs be applied simply consisting of a balanced diet and without any radical measures.

Anyhoot, I don't want to appropriate lilowl53's thread with my experience, I should probably update my thread ... but I just thought the information might be of interest.

edit on 30 Jul 2011 by schrodingers dog because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 30 2011 @ 07:30 PM
edit on 30-7-2011 by neonitus because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 30 2011 @ 07:45 PM
reply to post by lilowl53

Eat more fresh fruits and vegetables then you normally do, though one mile walk is really not that much but then again it really depends on how in shape you are. And since you say you have a heart condition if I were you I would walk about 2 miles with a little bit of running here and there in those two miles. Do that till you are able to jog the whole 1 mile and walk the other.

Stay away from soda pops and foods high in sodium, drink plenty of water, and don't eat anything a couple of hours before you go to sleep. And that alone will make you lose some weight.

Basically dude what you have to do is eat healthier foods like some salads and less junk food, and eat less but don't over do it. Eat just enough to lose the weight but not to put strain on you body because food is fuel and without fuel your body strains, and if you put strain on your body you put strain on your dig. And then continue with your regular exercise program, and the weight should slowly start to drop.

Or you could do what I do, which is just exercise a lot more and burn more then I would eat/take in daily. Usually when I hit the gym I will lose about 5 pounds every time, thought its mostly water weight from all the sweating. And by tomorrow when I wake up I would have gained that 5 pounds back because I usually eat about 4 times a day and I will eat pretty much anything and yes even junk food, and snacks in between meals.

But I wouldn't recommend what I do, and basically as long as you burn it off its not really a problem what you eat or how much, and so its just a game of either getting your meals right and getting your lite exercises in check or in a pattern to lose weight. Or just eating as you normally do and exercising a lot more. It's one of those two, or a combination of both depending on what feels better for you.

posted on Jul, 30 2011 @ 08:59 PM
reply to post by DevolutionEvolvd

I would say I got this way over time, both my parents are big. My mom had an eatting disorder when I was a baby and used to be a VERY thin. All she ate was baked potatoes and green beans. My dad is more like me, loves ice cream, sugar, sugar, and more sugar. LOL. I was a dancer my whole life untill I turned 18 and struck out on my own, eatting all the crap I could afford and so on. I went threw a divorce two years ago...lost weight. I am now with a man who likes to EAT. Meat and three other sides at dinner, I think his bad habbit rubs off, I make the food, and since he won't eat left overs, I end up trying to "clean up" what's left. I have been cutting my portion sizes for about a week now, less than the size of my fist. So far I am doing Ok, but I am not going to calorie count at all, I don't have the time and like you said it is impossible.

Also my heart problem is unrelated to obesity, I was in a car wreck about two years ago and it torn a tiny whole in a ventrical. No surgery needed if I reduce the stress. I also started getting into meditation to reduce stress, and I have to say that it is amazing!

I really appriciate the input, thanks so much!

posted on Jul, 30 2011 @ 09:01 PM

Originally posted by schrodingers dog
reply to post by lilowl53


Awesome! Thank you!

posted on Jul, 30 2011 @ 10:36 PM
I strongly suggest learning about the foods with hidden sugars in them. Did you know that 1 8oz glass of milk has almost a whole day's sugars? An orange or glass of orange juice has almost a whole days sugars, a soda pop is a whole days sugars, spaghetti sauce, most boxed foods (such as mac&cheese/hamburger helper) also high in sugars.

The jorge cruise diet will give you the sugar/carb count ability to adjust your diet daily so you can eat less sugars/carbs earlier in the day and still be full, in order to have that spaghetti or whatever it is you want for supper that is higher in sugars/carbs.

There is alot of "free" foods too, such as pickles, raw veggies, meat, hard boiled eggs, salad, and so on.

Once we "learned the secrets" I found recipes on the internet for strawberry shortcake and other good stuff that counted as 0 sugars! (because it was made with confectioners sugar instead of granulated sugar)

The included booklet/chart is really simple, and this diet does work. It is so simple my 10 year old can follow it, and she lost 15 lbs the healthy way (she was borderline obese). She still has about the same amount to lose, but we've worked on maintaining her current weight for 3 months before continuing (when school starts) AND SHE DID MAINTAIN without counting (and without me hovering over her).

I'm not advertising by the way... I just know this diet works!

posted on Jul, 31 2011 @ 02:32 PM

Originally posted by dbates
reply to post by DevolutionEvolvd

To be more to the point, you want more muscle because it burns calories even when you're at rest.

Before I get into this, I want to say that I think this is healthy discussion and I agree with much of what you're saying...but these things I disagree on are common misunderstandings that plague health and nutrition.

While it's true that building muscle will increase calories expended (mainly fat from the fat cells), it's a gross over estimation to assume that adding a couple of pounds of muscle will cause a drastic increase. What's more likely, and is more biochemically sound, is the idea that increasing muscle tissue decreases insulin resistance which, in turn, allows for more TO be burned by the muscles.

Simply cutting calories isn't healthy because it lowers your metabolism. Exercise counters this process.

Sometimes. If, for instance, you're exercising correctly, causing excessive post-workout oxygen consumption (EPOC). But generally, exercise increases metabolism during the physical exertion (obviously) but then the body counters to a lack of calories, or negative energy balance, by conserving energy. Metabolism slows, laziness and fatigue and a lack of will to do anything ensue until A)you eat more or B)you rest more.

Of course once you get to the weight range you want then you don't have to worry about calories as much just for maintenance but don't kid yourself into believing that you can be healthy and not monitor your calories.

I'm not kidding myself. How many animals do you know that monitor their calories? Wild animals in their natural habitat are rarely overweight (except those that hibernate) and yet they don't count calories. And many of them have an abundant food source. If you're eating healthily, it's almost impossible to overeat...unless, of course, you're purposefully gorging yourself. When I consult someone, I never have them monitor calories (except certain cases where overeating or undereating is needed to produce muscle or cut fat on an a person already in good shape). I simply give them the proper foods to eat and tell them to eat when their hungry until they're full.

Don't kid YOURself into believing the body doesn't already have a calorie monitoring system in place and, when running properly, it does all the counting unconsciously.

Meals matter as much or more than the exercise part, but proper exercise does reduce the need to watch your meals as much.

I agree. But typically for people who are already in pretty good shape. For someone who is obese, this wouldn't be the case. I've played basketball with guys who would play 4-5 days a week, 1-3 hours at a time (intermittently, of course) and still carry that extra 20-30 pounds around. We see the same thing in obesity research. Researchers and experts will readily admit that calorie counting, caloric restriction and especially exercise simply aren't effective fat loss tools in the long term, but still cling to the idea that calories in/calories out is the answer because..well, IT'S PHYSICS!

Nobody is arguing the idea that in order to have weightloss you must have a negative caloric balance. DUH! That's kind of redundant. Just like it's quite obvious that weightgain is the product of a positive caloric balance. Obesity experts actually repeat the these tautological ideologies when explaining why people get fat and how they can lose weight. It would be like someone telling an alcoholic that he's an alcoholic because he drinks so much!

It doesn't address the why and the how. Ignoring those questions and misapplying thermodynamics to a self-regulating system of hormones and biochemical reactions is how we end up the the flawed idea that simply eating less or exercising more is the cure for obesity.

posted on Jul, 31 2011 @ 04:10 PM
reply to post by DevolutionEvolvd

This was just published a few days ago. And it's precisely exactly what I've been preaching, especially over the past few years.

Obesity and energy balance: is the tail wagging the dog?

The scientific study of obesity has been dominated throughout the twentieth century by the concept of energy balance. This conceptual approach, based on fundamental thermodynamic principles, states that energy cannot be destroyed, and can only be gained, lost or stored by an organism. Its application in obesity research has emphasised excessive appetite (gluttony), or insufficient physical activity (sloth), as the primary determinants of excess weight gain, reflected in current guidelines for obesity prevention and treatment. This model cannot explain why weight accumulates persistently rather than reaching a plateau, and underplays the effect of variability in dietary constituents on energy and intermediary metabolism. An alternative model emphasises the capacity of fructose and fructose-derived sweeteners (sucrose, high-fructose corn syrup) to perturb cellular metabolism via modification of the adenosine monophosphate (AMP)/adenosine triphosphate (ATP) ratio, activation of AMP kinase and compensatory mechanisms, which favour adipose tissue accretion and increased appetite while depressing physical activity. This conceptual model implicates chronic hyperinsulinaemia in the presence of a paradoxical state of ‘cellular starvation’ as a key driver of the metabolic modifications inducing chronic weight gain. We combine evidence from in vitro and in vivo experiments to formulate a perspective on obesity aetiology that emphasises metabolic flexibility and dietary composition rather than energy balance. Using this model, we question the direction of causation of reported associations between obesity and sleep duration or childhood growth. Our perspective generates new hypotheses, which can be tested to improve our understanding of the current obesity epidemic, and to identify novel strategies for prevention or treatment.

In english: Energy balance (calories in/calories out) dominates obesity research and treatment despite its efficacy being less than acceptable. In healthy individuals much of the concept of energy balance certainly applies. But once the metabolism is broken by elements of the diet that wreak havoc on biochemical pathways (such as fructose and fructose sweetened beverages), a vicious cycle ensues. Insulin resistance and High insulin levels tend to force calories to the fat cells, directing them away from other cells in need of energy essentially starving causing them to starve at a cellular level...which explains why obese people are always hungry, despite eating frequent, large meals. And would explain why obese people are lazy.

I don't have access to the full article, but I'm sure the basic premise is: Gluttony and sloth are actually symptoms of obesity...not the causes.

posted on Aug, 22 2011 @ 09:24 AM
I tend to do well on low gi diets, they end up focusing on whole grains and lots of veggies the only downside is they substitute splenda for sugar and splenda gives me headaches so you have to play with what sugar substitute you use. Also I did the Medifast diet for a while and had a lot of success on it but it's not cheap you also have to get used to the condiment restrictions. Still use some of their lean and green meals as goto meals because they are also generally low carb/low gi and delicious.

posted on Aug, 23 2011 @ 06:21 AM
Public Humilation Diet

I used to weigh about 360 pounds. I currently weight about 280. It's because of this and zero junk/fast food that I'm down this damn low. Still going strong since the beginning of the year.

posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 03:25 PM
reply to post by lilowl53

Good evening,

I was 96kg 6 months ago. Now i'm 69kg and holding with ease.

"Eat breakfest yourself, share your dinner with a friend, and leave your evening meal for your foe".

Don't eat after 18:00 at all. First few weeks it's gonna be hard, so just drink like 2 tea cups every evening, what it does firstly is that it shrinks your stomach, thus after 3 months time, you will not be able to eat much in evenings anyway. + the most important part - WORKOUT: run 1-7km 4-5 days in a week (increase kilometers once a week). You will get yourself in shape in 3 months time. Thats what i did. It's brutal, but it works, and it's long lasting IF you reach your target and keep running occasionally (3 times a week or so). Also the plus side is that you will not keep stuffing crap in your throat for no reason in the evenings - you will have no desire for it whatsoever, since your stomack will not be a black hole and your metabolism will change drastically, you will not pick up much, it will all go down the drain.

EDIT: FOOD: In the morning - eat whatever the hell your imagination comes up with, in daytime - try to eat different kind of soups once in 2-3 days. That's about it.

Set up a target weight, succeed no matter what and hold it! And whenever you feel like letting go - remember how hard you had to work to get that sweet body up and running!
edit on 24-8-2011 by beer because: forgot

posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 06:22 PM
I can't give you any dietary advice, there are people here who are qualified to do that.

BUT, I do agree with cutting out the evening snacks. I have two meals a day, lunch and dinner and any fruit I like during the daytime.

If I start to feel a bit peckish later I remind myself that I've had enough food for the day and I won't drop down dead or start to suffer malnutrition if I don't eat any more.

Believe it or not, that works. You just need to know that you've had sufficient food to ensure your survival

Besides that, keep things simple. Cut out spreads and dressings if you can. A while ago I developed a taste for peanut butter - I soon lost it when I noticed my weight going up. Back to plain toast for me and no more problems

I think, too, a little more walking if you can. My friend has a heart condition, but can manage a few miles a day if we take it easy. Of course, cut back if you find yourself struggling.

posted on Aug, 24 2011 @ 06:43 PM
reply to post by lilowl53

My younger bro, always heavy, did slimgenics...lost 85 lbs and has kept it off for two years - he swears by it.


new topics

top topics

<< 1    3 >>

log in